Cynthia Lummis

In recognition of the fact that the concern here is the unilateral decrease of the alert status, I now yield the balance of my time to the gentleman from Alabama (Mr. Rogers), the chair of the Armed Services Committee's Strategic Forces…

Today, I rise in support of the Lummis-Zinke-Cramer-Smith amendment: to prohibit the unilateral decrease of the alert status of our Nation's ICBM force. Nuclear deterrence is based on the fundamental belief that a nuclear attack on the…

That will lead to project delays, project modifications, added costs, mitigation costs, and, in some cases, even project denials.

Why are you providing this----

Even with the guidance, a non-binding guidance, access to the courts is somehow----

What would be the practical effects of an agency not following the guidance?

So if a disagreement occurs between agencies about the application of the guidance, would CEQ get involved?

This so-called guidance didn't even go through rulemaking, which is astounding when you consider its economic impacts.

Look, major Federal decisions should be informed by an understanding of how they impact our environment.

The new greenhouse gas guidance assumes that any greenhouse gas emissions contribute to global climate change, and are hence environmental impacts.

But the Council on Environmental Quality's revised draft guidance on greenhouse gas emissions turns NEPA on its head.

The Federal Government needs to follow the lead of State-based utilities and harden the grid against an EMP threat.

That's why I support Congressman Trent Franks' Critical Infrastructure Protection Act.

I agree with Chairman DeSantis that the Federal Government needs to take the EMP threat seriously by including it in DHS national planning scenario.

So it's not chump change.

In round two, I will recognize myself for 5 minutes.

The gentleman's time has expired. Thank you.

It appears that at one point, the fact that ERI was concluding there was no adverse material impact was OK but then when they decided, we cannot say that anymore, that was when DOE intervened and said, oops that is a Secretarial…

Holding up offshore energy production is not a solution.

Offshore energy production is necessary for the United States to achieve lasting energy security, which also means economic security, national security, and job security for the men and women in the offshore industry.

Fixing the safety shortfalls that led to that explosion isn't just the right thing to do for the workers, their families, and the environment. It's a necessity, and that is because offshore energy production is a necessity.

Thank you for holding this hearing on the safety in offshore energy production.

Without objection, so ordered.

I believe that the tens of millions of people who suffer from respiratory disease, breathing problems, heart problems, small birth weight, is above 100 million according to the American Lung Association.

The gentlelady yields. The Chair now recognizes the gentleman from Arizona, Dr. Gosar.